Currently,
if you don’t keep your firearms locked away from minor children, there
are civil and criminal liabilities that apply to a minor accessing your
unlocked firearm and causing harm. In other words, there has to actually
be a victim in order for it to be a criminal.

This
bill removes the word ‘minor’ from those statutes, making it a
requirement that everyone’s firearms be locked up when not on their
person. It also expands your criminal and civil liability for someone
accessing your firearms against your will.

Even
more disturbingly, the bill then goes on to change the burden of proof
for a defendant during a risk warrant hearing. This changes the current
‘innocent until proven guilty’ system, which is already heavily
perverted by the risk warrant law, and makes it clear that upon an
accusation, you are guilty until proven innocent.

OPPOSE - Senate Bill 650 – (Official title - AN ACT CONCERNING TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDERS) A bill seeking to remove due process from the restraining order processOPPOSE - House Bill 6848 - (Official title -AN ACT PROTECTING VICTIMS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE) A bill seeking to remove due process from the restraining order process

These bills will wrongfully violate the fundamental rights of hundreds of people per year based only on hearsay. In 2014, 45% of all ex parte temporary restraining orders were found to be not valid after the hearing. They would require that a firearms owner surrender his por her firearms within 24 hours of issuance of a temporary restraining order, before any court hearing takes place.Using the confusion of the difference between a Temporary
Restraining Order [TRO] and a Restraining Order [RO] that many people have and
trying to make it sound like it would be a ‘common sense’ idea for
someone to lose their firearms during a Temporary Restraining Order.

The
reality is that there is little that is similar about a TRO and an RO. A
TRO is an ex parte order, meaning that only one side has presented
anything to the court. In other words, the subject of the TRO has had no
opportunity to be heard or represented. This clearly violates the
concept and idea of Due Process, but further, it actually negatively
impacts public safety as well.

Info on these bills courtesy of Connecticut Carry
NEVER
ASSUME that if a politician is from a different political party or has
spoken out in public that favors one side of an issue or another, that
they will not listen to hear another point of view. That is their responsibility - to hear varied opinions - and you can hold them to hearing you out. But you need to plan strategically.

If you do not know your state representatives you can find who they are